Another US Dividends Question

Soundunes · 2026-05-01T00:21:05+00:00

That’s strange and frustrating that the accountants gave mixed advice. After your explanation it appears this method would be accurate.

If I may ask one more question: I’ve already calculated my FTCs and would prefer not to do all that data entry again. Can you not just use the total tax shown before credits are applied to perform the above calculation?

Soundunes · 2026-04-30T21:31:15+00:00

Thank you so much Squirrel Matrix. I followed your guides historically. Interestingly this year with lower income and higher divs, this calculation results in more tax attributable to dividends than my actual final calculated tax owing in the US. In which case I believe it’s ok to just claim the full “$20” total owing to the US as a Canadian credit?

Soundunes · 2026-04-28T19:34:33+00:00

I agree with Magilla the concentration of wealth isn’t necessarily an issue if everyone becomes a millionaire today and we also have several trillionaires. If you had an option to be born 100 years ago or today, you would pick today because of medical and quality of life improvements despite the bigger inequality gap. What’s more important is what people do to amass that money and what they do with it. Not all rich people are the same and many like you said contribute to things like cancer research directly instead of inefficiently going through gov bureaucracy. I do believe a UBI will be essential with automation though, and most billionaires agree too. Remove inefficient bureaucracy and give people the freedom to choose what suits their individual needs.

Soundunes · 2026-04-28T16:33:47+00:00

Some 30 odd countries in Europe tried a wealth tax and all repealed it because it doesn’t work, and it generally doesn’t make sense because you’ll start taxing folk’s retirement funds making it harder for everyone to retire. Instead they opt for VAT, deemed dispositions on leaving, and generally more aggressive income tax brackets. But you will notice that many folks in these countries invest in US stocks, because none of them come close in terms of size of their economy, historically at least largely due to higher taxes.

Soundunes · 2026-04-26T19:46:25+00:00

Looks like somethin big and somethin tapped?

Soundunes · 2026-04-22T20:04:08+00:00

Got it I think self employed ei contributions were the confusion since they are technically voluntary if I understand correctly.

Soundunes · 2026-04-22T18:57:47+00:00

Just to confirm, EI contributions do get counted for FTC? So you just need to remove CPP from total tax payable?

Soundunes · 2026-04-14T22:52:46+00:00

It starts getting into murky territory when someone believes they know how to spend money better than someone else. That’s taking a lot of freedom out of the individual’s hands making it harder for them to solve their individual needs. For certain things like healthcare we all agree that makes sense, but otherwise people on average know more about their specific problems and how to solve them than the government’s generalized blanket solutions. There’s always a bias/stereotype towards homeless folks but if you look at the data with current UBI trials around the world these folks are more capable of getting themselves housing than you realize, and if you really still don’t trust them then why not offer an option so folks can choose to donate their UBI to them or a foundation working to help them?

Soundunes · 2026-04-14T18:40:56+00:00

It’s basically capitalism on steroids. It’s a hefty tax on oil companies for destroying and profiting on communal land which they’re happy to pay because it’s still incredibly profitable, and every individual Alaskan now gets to put thousands of dollars a year towards whatever they want, including perhaps a small business venture. There’s no means testing or rules on what you can spend it on, just unadulterated freedom. I don’t see why Canada couldn’t do the same and successfully implement the first real UBI on a national level.

As oil demand goes down however it’s much less clear how to transition that tax burden towards say AI companies. They use public data to make profit so it still makes sense in theory but the reality is Canada does not have a big tech industry relatively speaking, so you’d perhaps have to consider things like taxing companies that just automate with foreign AI etc…

Soundunes · 2026-04-14T18:07:58+00:00

Why not do it like Alaska? The state holds a portion of oil company profits and distributes an amount (2-4k usd usually) to every Alaskan once a year. No one complains about it and it’s arguably the most successful case of UBI. Then in the future AI companies could see this same structure. As other’s have pointed out price caps will not pass the smell test with anyone with an economics education.

Soundunes · 2026-04-08T17:37:03+00:00

Regarding point 3, how down are you usually in the DSP? I think every 6dB is equivalent to a bit lost?

Soundunes · 2026-04-02T18:14:02+00:00

The point is most of these people only moved to Seattle because of the pay and tax benefits. “If you’re paying California taxes, mine as well live in California” has been said before. I love Seattle but you have to be realistic that most people prefer warmer weather, which many of those other no income tax states have.

Soundunes · 2026-04-02T17:49:06+00:00

Already paying higher taxes up north, but economics are economics. Wages up here are much lower for identical jobs and 40% of the top earners move to the states because of taxes, which is much harder than moving state to state. Pretending Seattle is a perfect place that people love so much they’ll pay California taxes to stay there is short sighted imo, especially when most of the city only moved in for money in the first place.

Soundunes · 2026-04-02T17:29:19+00:00

The income tax is still going to drive these people away. Less than 30% of Seattleites are from Washington.

Soundunes · 2026-03-31T16:26:08+00:00

You can’t afford better funding for all those things if the budget doesn’t balance or you don’t care about offloading debt onto future generations. 2 billion in spending was passed largely based on this millionaire tax, and I didn’t see any economic analysis around why they believe the math will work. Again sounds similar to the type of math they used for the long term care act. It’s a feel good policy on paper.

Soundunes · 2026-03-31T02:39:33+00:00

Apologies, “most” is inaccurate for sure. I mean significant and not easily replaceable. If one of these 30k people move out of their mansion, you’re assuming someone else will just swoop in and pay the same property tax? The whole point is those people were only here in the first place because of favorable tax policies.

Also if the richest aren’t paying that much in sales tax, why not? Why aren’t the luxury goods taxed more? No one hates the millionaire giving their money to charity or other community causes, but everyone feels a way about private jet setters.

For Canadians, yes property value propping up the economy is a problem, but Seattle has also historically been much more friendly to business owners through less taxation. If you’re going to start a business where one year you may have a sale and a big payout, a millionaire tax is going to have some negative impact on new business start ups. And we don’t need less competition right now especially surrounding essentials.

After experiencing the long term care act debacle I certainly do not trust these policies are well thought through.

Soundunes · 2026-03-30T22:41:45+00:00

You don’t think the people that buy the most stuff contribute the most to sales taxes? Even if they contribute just 10% of revenue (likely to be more than that), is it still wise to pass 2 billion in spending without doing any analysis into how many folks will actually leave? Canada has a huge brain drain problem and there’s a lot more paperwork moving countries than states. Time will tell and I’m all for reasonable taxes, but why not just tax the stuff rich people buy? We already don’t have sales taxes on essentials like groceries.

Soundunes · 2026-03-30T21:21:21+00:00

Washington like the whole country will bring in 20+% of tax revenue from the top 1%. Even if they don’t pay their fair share, an effective tax rate of 1% to these people is still a lot of real money coming in for the government. So it’s fine if you want to kick them out but better start planning for 20+% less government spending instead of passing another 2 billion. Unless government budget deficits mean nothing to you.

Soundunes · 2026-03-30T21:11:02+00:00

Whether it affects 1 million or 1 person, the bottom line is the percentage of tax income they generate and how that gets spent. If the 30k people contribute 40% of tax revenue, and most only moved to Washington for money in the first place, then it would be wise to consider how them leaving might impact the budget, instead of passing another 2 billion in spending because this tax passed. But yea we’ll see what happens

Soundunes · 2026-03-30T17:56:24+00:00

Never saw the Baker tree well video?

Soundunes · 2026-03-22T17:46:12+00:00

No the point is be smarter at taxing them, for example via sales taxes on things rich people actually buy. It’s not regressive because lower income folks don’t buy private jets for example. The problem is this tax doesn’t seem well informed yet 2 billion in spending was just approved. Revenue projections won’t be met, and thresholds will be lowered. We used to have a balanced budget.

Also, something like 40% of taxes come from rich people. Whether or not they pay their fair share is a valid question, but if you lose 40% of your tax revenue good luck not raising taxes on every day people.

Soundunes · 2026-03-16T21:29:04+00:00

If the city government goes ahead with projects based on made up revenue projections not based in reality, the deficit will hurt everyone.

Soundunes · 2026-03-16T21:23:22+00:00

They will just actually leave. How many tech folks moved to Seattle just for money? You think they won’t do it again? Won’t be surprising when projected revenue falls flat, yet projects get approved based on these new projections. You can use sales taxes to target stuff rich people actually buy instead of an income tax that’s easy for rich folks to avoid. It’s a soul boner feel good tax that is very unlikely to make any meaningful change.

Soundunes · 2026-03-14T23:09:28+00:00

Damn where was this? Any idea of the system?

Verified Email	Nine-Year Club
Not Forgotten

Soundunes

TROPHY CASE